3 ms·

Oh come on! Hundreds of minor variations on the 'round blobby SUV with redundant angular surface forms' style; thousands of different variations on 'fat and wat

Oh come on! Hundreds of minor variations on the 'round blobby SUV with redundant angular surface forms' style; thousands of different variations on 'fat and water emulsified together with a dash of scent' for making your skin softer; fifty gorillion different types of shampoo - 'Because you're worth it!'. I'm all for a Hayek/Friedman approach to the markets, but I think even they would consider above trivialities in comparison with things like a supportive family, spiritual nourishment, a shared culture, social stability, etc. etc. The market needs to be kept in perspective. If all of that (illusory) choice was vastly attenuated tomorrow, people would quickly adapt.

robocat 7y ago
No-one should be deciding for others what should be important. If I were a dictator, maybe I would think pets are pointless. Another person may think science is pointless. I think the vast majority of what people want is wasteful, but who am I to tell others what their priorities should be?
- growlist 7y ago
  > No-one should be deciding for others what should be important. And yet, Greta Thunberg.
majewsky 7y ago
How exactly does cutting down the number of shampoo brands help fix the Coronavirus crisis? Even if you go from 1000 shampoo variants to maybe a dozen, the amount of shampoo that's produced does not change significantly. The only effect this is going to have is discrimination against minorities with special needs. I have atopic dermatitis and need to buy shampoo at the pharmacy for absurd prices because the regular shampoo brands have cut me out of their audience Pareto-style ("catch 80% of the market with 20% of the effort").
- growlist 7y ago
  I don't think the 'I must have argan oil and lime caviar in my next shampoo because the advert says so' need is qualitatively the same as your clinical need though is it? If anything I'd say that indicates the failure of unrestricted markets. This all started with black_puppydog's comment: > I don't agree with the conclusion. We can scale down our economies and still maintain production of essentials by ``drumroll`` scaling back shit that nobody needs. Anybody whose life would be drastically worsened by having 10 different types of shampoo rather than x hundred needs help.
  - Mirioron 7y ago
    Maybe not shampoo, but some people can't seem to stand certain types of toothpaste with sodium lauryl sulfate in it. It apartment aggregates canker sores in their mouth. Those are most of the types of toothpastes you can buy. If you cut out almost all toothpaste products you'd likely eliminate the ones without this substance. We might think of this specific point when selecting the types of toothpaste that we will allow, but how many other such niches will we miss on all the other products?
    - growlist 7y ago
      If it pleases you to deliberately misinterpret my comments fill your boots.
- scotty79 7y ago
  > How exactly does cutting down the number of shampoo brands help fix the Coronavirus crisis? It will relase the capacity of people that are currently brainstorming how to cram their brand of shampoo into their customers homes instead of all the other brands.
badpun 7y ago
I suspect you need dozens of actors to keep a market healthy. With only a couple producers, collusion is too easy. I suspect the auto market is already heading in the wrong direction, with all the mergers that we constantly keep hearing about... For example, I've noticed that, over the past 5 years, cars have gotten significantly more expensive where I live, without a corresponding quality increase.

robocat 7y ago

No-one should be deciding for others what should be important. If I were a dictator, maybe I would think pets are pointless. Another person may think science is pointless. I think the vast majority of what people want is wasteful, but who am I to tell others what their priorities should be?

growlist 7y ago
> No-one should be deciding for others what should be important. And yet, Greta Thunberg.

majewsky 7y ago

How exactly does cutting down the number of shampoo brands help fix the Coronavirus crisis? Even if you go from 1000 shampoo variants to maybe a dozen, the amount of shampoo that's produced does not change significantly. The only effect this is going to have is discrimination against minorities with special needs. I have atopic dermatitis and need to buy shampoo at the pharmacy for absurd prices because the regular shampoo brands have cut me out of their audience Pareto-style ("catch 80% of the market with 20% of the effort").

growlist 7y ago
I don't think the 'I must have argan oil and lime caviar in my next shampoo because the advert says so' need is qualitatively the same as your clinical need though is it? If anything I'd say that indicates the failure of unrestricted markets. This all started with black_puppydog's comment: > I don't agree with the conclusion. We can scale down our economies and still maintain production of essentials by ``drumroll`` scaling back shit that nobody needs. Anybody whose life would be drastically worsened by having 10 different types of shampoo rather than x hundred needs help.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  Maybe not shampoo, but some people can't seem to stand certain types of toothpaste with sodium lauryl sulfate in it. It apartment aggregates canker sores in their mouth. Those are most of the types of toothpastes you can buy. If you cut out almost all toothpaste products you'd likely eliminate the ones without this substance. We might think of this specific point when selecting the types of toothpaste that we will allow, but how many other such niches will we miss on all the other products?
  - growlist 7y ago
    If it pleases you to deliberately misinterpret my comments fill your boots.
scotty79 7y ago
> How exactly does cutting down the number of shampoo brands help fix the Coronavirus crisis? It will relase the capacity of people that are currently brainstorming how to cram their brand of shampoo into their customers homes instead of all the other brands.

badpun 7y ago

I suspect you need dozens of actors to keep a market healthy. With only a couple producers, collusion is too easy. I suspect the auto market is already heading in the wrong direction, with all the mergers that we constantly keep hearing about... For example, I've noticed that, over the past 5 years, cars have gotten significantly more expensive where I live, without a corresponding quality increase.